The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

[OpIv37]

is that with a couple of injuries, you're forced to abandon the base D and play nickel the entire game.

Which might not be a big deal, except that we already had two CB's and a S injured, and this was after losing our best CB to FA in the off-season.

So, even with 3 injuries, our DB situation was STILL better than our LB situation and playing nickel as our base D was the best option.

AAAARRRRGGH! I don't know how anyone can deny that there are wholesale problems with how this organization is managed.

[OpIv37]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

no thoughts on this?

I really thing we burned ourselves- anyone still think it was a good idea to trade Spikes?

[Typ0]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

I've been saying this for two years now and think it's been ignored. Special teams are a luxury that should never detract from offense and defense like it has on this team. Let's be real, how long are special teams on the field compared to the other two units. People rave about how good our special teams are but it doesn't mean squat in terms of wins and losses when you can't stop the run and put up points!

[Nighthawk]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

is that with a couple of injuries, you're forced to abandon the base D and play nickel the entire game.

Which might not be a big deal, except that we already had two CB's and a S injured, and this was after losing our best CB to FA in the off-season.

So, even with 3 injuries, our DB situation was STILL better than our LB situation and playing nickel as our base D was the best option.

AAAARRRRGGH! I don't know how anyone can deny that there are wholesale problems with how this organization is managed.

I've been saying this for awhile. It just doesn't make sense to keep so many ST players who can't actually play football when called upon.

[YardRat]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

Bobby April is a great ST coach, but is it a possibility he has too much influence on the final make-up of the roster?

[don137]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

What makes no sense is you keep all these great special teamers but then you don't use your most electrofying return man in Parrish for kick off returns next to McGee when McGee is out injured.

[YardRat]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

What makes no sense is you keep all these great special teamers but then you don't use your most electrofying return man in Parrish for kick off returns next to McGee when McGee is out injured.

Scobey sucks. I would much rather have Parrish back there.

[gr8slayer]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

Scobey sucks. I would much rather have Parrish back there.

No doubt.

[HHURRICANE]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

Scobey sucks. I would much rather have Parrish back there.

Scobey blows!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Elminster]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

IMO, it's a good thing to keep some ST aces. Especially Wire, since he's a decent linebacker too, but we have certainly gone overboard in that regard....

[justasportsfan]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

no thoughts on this?

I really thing we burned ourselves- anyone still think it was a good idea to trade Spikes?

yes. He wanted out. So he's gone. It's not like he's lighting the league on fire.

[gr8slayer]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

no thoughts on this?

I really thing we burned ourselves- anyone still think it was a good idea to trade Spikes?

Spikes sucks/sucked. I'm more pissed off about letting Fletcher go.

[OpIv37]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

Spikes sucks/sucked. I'm more pissed off about letting Fletcher go.

yes. He wanted out. So he's gone. It's not like he's lighting the league on fire.

but right now, we don't even have enough bodies to play LB. And we're going to end up signing someone else's reject.

Which would you rather have- a disgruntled, underachieving Spikes or another team's camp fodder? I'll take Spikes.

[Mr. Pink]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

but right now, we don't even have enough bodies to play LB. And we're going to end up signing someone else's reject.

Which would you rather have- a disgruntled, underachieving Spikes or another team's camp fodder? I'll take Spikes.

Op...I don't disagree with you often but I gotta disagree here.

We all know what Spikes has left which is a shade above nothing. Players tend to not come back anywhere near where they were with his type of injury. Going with what his payscale is, he's nowhere near worth it to be on the field. I know you'll argue that we didn't spend the money we saved by trading him which is a valid point but say Ellison, Haggan, Stamer, Wire, whoever went out and outproduced Spikes by a ton. We'd have issues with a guy who'd clearly not be good enough demanding a pay raise. It's good economic and business sense to dump Spikes in order not to upset the applecart. I hope I got that out the way I meant it and that it made sense.

I'd much rather take a chance on someone's camp fodder or a different LB to bring in and that was before the injuries. I'm still POd that we let Fletcher go, I wouldn't say give him a 5 year deal, we coulda gone 3 year 12 to 16 million and been fine. Played him in the middle and put Poz on the weak side to start the year.

All this being said, bring Al Wilson and Lavar Arrington in for physicals, if either can pass the physical, sign them. Neither should come with a high price tag at this point seeing obviously not too many teams are interested in either of them...and yes I know Wilson already failed a physical this year, but who knows...we gotta try something.

[SamAdamsFan]

Re: The problem with keeping guys for ST ability

The best part about this defense after all these injuries is that we are almost assured the top draft pick, that is if they actually spend the money to sign him.